Omega 3 snake oil Posted June 4, 2016 Posted June 4, 2016 15:30 - onwardStef just doesn't get it. He doesn't get the horrors of today's dating market. If you're a man looking for marriage or just a LTR, you need to date two points down, eg a man who's a 7 needs to date/marry a woman who's a 5. 3
Mister Mister Posted June 4, 2016 Posted June 4, 2016 I think Stef has admitted that he is not in the dating market at the moment, and doesn't know directly how things have changed. He seems to mention it every other time that this topic comes up. But I think it's also to push back against this kind of determinist, which is just the sexual/romantic version of "I'm not reaching my economic potential and career goals because the system is broken!" 2
aviet Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 eg a man who's a 7 needs to date/marry a woman who's a 5. Why do you believe this? And what is that score based on? Looks only? Everything? 1
utopian Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 While I don't quite agree with the video, I do think Stef's views of the dating scene are outdated, most specifically in the western world. With factors like socialist state support, feminism, and multiple economic variables, the motivating factors for women to find and settle down with a single quality man have been all but obliterated. Women these days jump from one guy to another, taking flight at the slightest hint of discontent, or facing reality for that matter. There is no room for men to have morals, expectations, or even a heart. I know better than to start talking about economics, politics, child development, philosophy, or anything real with women these days when I go out. A witty line, the right dance moves, some sexual tension and maybe a drink (if she's not buying her own) produces the only chance at procreation. Anyone seen the movie "idocracy" where the dumb people multiply like rabbits and the intelligent people dont have a single kid? It's like that. It's some of the same reasons why people are jumping on the Hillary bandwagon. It's not about intellect, it's about emotions. An ex girlfriend of a friend of mine has four kids from four different dads, and collects child support and alimony from all of them. Another girl I know loves to come over to another friend of mine's apartment and talk about how her baby daddy owes her 500 a month but does not have a job, while she just broke up with another guy she was banging cause he's broke. All this while she's hanging out at my friend's house drinking and smoking while her 6 month old is left at her grandmothers house. Oh, and my personal favorite, a woman once tried to get me to sleep with her without a condom. I always used one, and later found out she was pregnant and was trying to get me to think it was gonna be my kid. There is no quality to be found in women any more, unless you want to attempt relations with a woman who can't get you aroused. Men know this, and so we just go around hoping for a pretty face who is somewhat sane whom with we can have some illusion of a relationship before the inevitable breakup. If all men were to abide strictly by the standards Stephan might demand, I have no doubt 95% of the population would go extinct, lonely and miserable. The only men getting anywhere with women are those most capable of entertaining women, regardless of child developing qualities. Often in spite of them. I think I have known there is no love or care to be reasonably expected from this world since the day I was a newborn being shaken by my parents for crying too much. I think that's why it's easy for me to play this modern dating game. I don't have a heart to bother with. 3
shirgall Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 While the dating market always revolves around catering to the whims and passions of 20-something females, that doesn't make it the best way to perpetuate the species.
Sima Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 My doctor is a female , and looks very intelligent, also good looking, maybe 8-9. And she was nice to me. Maybe if you look around you will find some quality women.
utopian Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 Actually, it is. If you do a simple google search on the word "argument" you will find the following definitions; 1. an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one. "I've had an argument with my father" synonyms: quarrel, disagreement, squabble, fight, dispute, wrangle, clash, altercation, feud,contretemps, disputation, falling-out; More 2. a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong. I have stated opposing views, though there has been no real heated exchange. I typically do not engage in arguments anyway, only discussions. Though it seems you have no problem taking my examples of other people and trying to paint me with those failures. If you must be reminded of what I said, those were other people's failures, not mine. My sexual market value is successful enough, tyvm. I would appreciate you not projecting yourself on me. I don't deny I have some low quality friends. They entertain me, and I'm always happy to extend a hand of guidance if they care to take it. What I oppose is the idea that there is such a wide pool of quality people to choose from these days. That is not the case, and I am far from the only one recognizing it. My own personal experiences are just the tip of the iceberg, and clearly plenty of other men are experiencing the same thing. Where would you like me to start citing sources? Sargon of Akkad's daily examples of female hypocrisy? The MGTOW movement? Hell, Stephan's own seemingly daily run ins on the call in show where he's talking to single mothers and women who choose abusers and male strippers who talk about all the women looking for a quick bang with him? No, I think this is more likely a case of you plugging your ears to a fairly well known and recognized truth, and your dependence upon the little social justice neg rep supports that. I am sure the SJWs of Trump protesters and feminists and black lives matter would approve. I never did understand the hypocrisy of supposed anarchists depending on collectivist methods of justice like ostracism. Ben Franklin once said democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding on what to have for dinner. I'm sure you'd happily support a democratic state. 1
Kikker Posted June 5, 2016 Posted June 5, 2016 Actually, it is. If you do a simple google search on the word "argument" you will find the following definitions; 1. an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one. "I've had an argument with my father" synonyms: quarrel, disagreement, squabble, fight, dispute, wrangle, clash, altercation, feud,contretemps, disputation, falling-out; More 2. a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong. I have stated opposing views, though there has been no real heated exchange. I typically do not engage in arguments anyway, only discussions. Though it seems you have no problem taking my examples of other people and trying to paint me with those failures. If you must be reminded of what I said, those were other people's failures, not mine. My sexual market value is successful enough, tyvm. I would appreciate you not projecting yourself on me. I don't deny I have some low quality friends. They entertain me, and I'm always happy to extend a hand of guidance if they care to take it. What I oppose is the idea that there is such a wide pool of quality people to choose from these days. That is not the case, and I am far from the only one recognizing it. My own personal experiences are just the tip of the iceberg, and clearly plenty of other men are experiencing the same thing. Where would you like me to start citing sources? Sargon of Akkad's daily examples of female hypocrisy? The MGTOW movement? Hell, Stephan's own seemingly daily run ins on the call in show where he's talking to single mothers and women who choose abusers and male strippers who talk about all the women looking for a quick bang with him? No, I think this is more likely a case of you plugging your ears to a fairly well known and recognized truth, and your dependence upon the little social justice neg rep supports that. I am sure the SJWs of Trump protesters and feminists and black lives matter would approve. I never did understand the hypocrisy of supposed anarchists depending on collectivist methods of justice like ostracism. Ben Franklin once said democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding on what to have for dinner. I'm sure you'd happily support a democratic state. "Actually, it is. If you do a simple google search on the word "argument" you will find the following definitions;" Well aren't you a witty one, it should be obvious to anyone that MMD meant that you used invalid reasoning to support your point. "I don't deny I have some low quality friends. They entertain me, and I'm always happy to extend a hand of guidance if they care to take it." You are a generous god I must say. Anyway, inductive reasoning isn't the way to go when trying to establish to other people that the reality is different from their experience. If you're mad that people ask for statistics to back your empirical claim then you're on the wrong forum.
aviet Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 I don't deny I have some low quality friends. That is probably it. I have a a good group of friends, as it goes, from a moral and intellectual standpoint. Most of my friends have only had one girlfriend who they have been with for a long time. As a group we have ended up orbiting a relatively small pool of morally higher quality females. My one friend who has had a lot of partners has ended up a bit of a mess with anxiety and, I would guess, depression, he has had the most problems; particularly due to his desire for sexual gratification outside of the relationship, which was with a good girl and I believe is now destroyed. Relationships with less attractive females will be more likely to be long-term, but this does not necessarily mean they are morally better. It could just mean they are willing to hang on to what they have got, because they don't feel there are any better options. Up your own game - I'm not talking about manipulative pickup nonsense - and bring more value to the table. Could you give examples of the most effective areas in which game could be upped? This attitude is just guaranteeing nothing changes and that is a burden that you alone will need to carry. I agree with this. Same as blacks teaching their children they cannot get ahead because of white supremacy.
Will Torbald Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 A man complains that the fruit in the market is rotten and that he just gave up trying to find good picks. He cites examples of how his friends and people he knows got sick from eating the fruit and have severe problems with the produce. It's not an isolated problem either, everywhere there are people making the same case. Ah, but nay, says one man at the downtrodden. The problem is that you're not looking hard enough. You're being negative. It's all in your bad attitude! I found a great banana bunch for myself and I am very happy. Look, says the man of the beggining of the tale, that's all wonderful for you. The problem is not that you can't find good every once in a while. It's the we shouldn't have to dig through piles of rotten produce, fear illness, worms and parasites and hope we might just get a good one in the first place at all. It shouldn't be this way, it wasn't this way just a few decades ago, and something definitely changed the quality of the market. Yes, I became pessimistic, but no one should blame those who couldn't find a banana bunch like yours on the customers. Who's driving this place to hell? Who is making it so hard that people simply go on strike and eat artificial food with no substance en masse? This isn't right.
Matthew Ed Moran Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 Could you give examples of the most effective areas in which game could be upped? Podcast 3228 (first call)
utopian Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 Well aren't you a witty one, Your limbic system is showing. No doubt your emotional reliance gets you cliff jumping with all the other lemmings. I am glad you wrote more for me to read. I get satisfaction from knowing you wasted your time on me, and I will not be reading it. Posts like this are more evidence to support my original theory. You're only hurting yourself by universalizing your own personal failures. This attitude is just guaranteeing nothing changes and that is a burden that you alone will need to carry. Actually it doesn't. You've done nothing but continued to sing lalala with your fingers in your ears. I would be surprised if your sexual market value was as high as mine. It reminds me of the Idiocracy movie all over again. The supposedly intelligent remove themselves from the gene pool while the genes of the lower intelligents lives on. How many women jump at the chance to listen to you tell them about how women are naturally socialist beings? Or many of the other seemingly "misogynist" things Stef has to say? Meanwhile, I have lost count of the women I have been with. You're delusional if you think I have anything to lose here but your hypocrisy and failure of logic. Watch out everyone, the freedomain authority who's supposedly supports anarchy is neg repping me for supporting an opposing viewpoint. Not to mention depending on the same social justice system that Hillary/Bernie supporters use to argue against Trump. No, the person with something to lose here is you. Besides your hypocrisies, your denial of a problem recognized by others on this very thread and forum, to say nothing of the problem widely recognized outside this corner of the world, will make apparent the fact that you don't know what you are talking about and people should not listen to you. You have viewers to lose the more you go on denying this problem. All I have to lose is the favor of someone singing with their finger in their ears. 2
Kikker Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 Your limbic system is showing. No doubt your emotional reliance gets you cliff jumping with all the other lemmings. I am glad you wrote more for me to read. I get satisfaction from knowing you wasted your time on me, and I will not be reading it. Well you purposely misunderstood what other people said so it seems like you want to waste everyone's time, regardless of my presumed emotional state. Better to call you out on it.
Hermenegilda Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 Meanwhile, I have lost count of the women I have been with. I think this is a cause of your (and everyone's else who have similar attitude) problems with finding virtuous women. Sleeping around is not a trait that attracts them. And I feel very sorry for you as I think it would be much easier for you to find a one if only you changed this attitude. There are only few things more rewarding than finding a suitable partner who you know you will spend the rest of your life with because of your common values. Sleeping with countless number of women won't get you anywhere close to this goal... so don’t complain about women because you yourself are not in the sphere of interest of such virtuous women… 1
EclecticIdealist Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 A man complains that the fruit in the market is rotten and that he just gave up trying to find good picks. He cites examples of how his friends and people he knows got sick from eating the fruit and have severe problems with the produce. It's not an isolated problem either, everywhere there are people making the same case. Ah, but nay, says one man at the downtrodden. The problem is that you're not looking hard enough. You're being negative. It's all in your bad attitude! I found a great banana bunch for myself and I am very happy. Look, says the man of the beggining of the tale, that's all wonderful for you. The problem is not that you can't find good every once in a while. It's the we shouldn't have to dig through piles of rotten produce, fear illness, worms and parasites and hope we might just get a good one in the first place at all. It shouldn't be this way, it wasn't this way just a few decades ago, and something definitely changed the quality of the market. Yes, I became pessimistic, but no one should blame those who couldn't find a banana bunch like yours on the customers. Who's driving this place to hell? Who is making it so hard that people simply go on strike and eat artificial food with no substance en masse? This isn't right. And then, the man with the bunch of bananas points out the following: Okay, it's true that if you go shopping for fresh produce down by the garbage dump, you're very likely going to find nothing but rotting fruit and vegetables. Don't you know that the type of produce that is sold as such low prices as you're seemingly willing and able to pay is all going to be low quality!? I told you that if you want to get good, fresh, high quality produce, you have to go shopping where such produce is likely to be found. Yes it's occasionally possible to find good quality produce anywhere, even down by the garbage dump, but if you don't want to spend all of your time sifting and searching through very questionable produce, you're going to need to be able and willing to pay higher prices than what you may presently be able to afford. You say that the market for produce has changed in the past decade or two, and that may be the case; however, that doesn't change the fact that there is still a market for high quality produce, and the price of admission is higher than the price of admission down by the garbage dump. You will need to increase your ability to pay for the quality of produce you're looking for or accept the quality of produce you're currently willing to pay and able to afford.
Will Torbald Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 And then, the man with the bunch of bananas points out the following: Okay, it's true that if you go shopping for fresh produce down by the garbage dump, you're very likely going to find nothing but rotting fruit and vegetables. Don't you know that the type of produce that is sold as such low prices as you're seemingly willing and able to pay is all going to be low quality!? I told you that if you want to get good, fresh, high quality produce, you have to go shopping where such produce is likely to be found. Yes it's occasionally possible to find good quality produce anywhere, even down by the garbage dump, but if you don't want to spend all of your time sifting and searching through very questionable produce, you're going to need to be able and willing to pay higher prices than what you may presently be able to afford. You say that the market for produce has changed in the past decade or two, and that may be the case; however, that doesn't change the fact that there is still a market for high quality produce, and the price of admission is higher than the price of admission down by the garbage dump. You will need to increase your ability to pay for the quality of produce you're looking for or accept the quality of produce you're currently willing to pay and able to afford. And then, the man with the bunch of bananas points out the following: Okay, it's true that if you go shopping for fresh produce down by the garbage dump, you're very likely going to find nothing but rotting fruit and vegetables. Don't you know that the type of produce that is sold as such low prices as you're seemingly willing and able to pay is all going to be low quality!? I told you that if you want to get good, fresh, high quality produce, you have to go shopping where such produce is likely to be found. Yes it's occasionally possible to find good quality produce anywhere, even down by the garbage dump, but if you don't want to spend all of your time sifting and searching through very questionable produce, you're going to need to be able and willing to pay higher prices than what you may presently be able to afford. You say that the market for produce has changed in the past decade or two, and that may be the case; however, that doesn't change the fact that there is still a market for high quality produce, and the price of admission is higher than the price of admission down by the garbage dump. You will need to increase your ability to pay for the quality of produce you're looking for or accept the quality of produce you're currently willing to pay and able to afford. But sir, what you call the garbage dump is what used to be the high quality market. The decadence is everywhere. Telling the men that they have to pay more will work for a few who can afford it. What's left for the rest? The minority of high quality women will find the minority of men able to afford - and then the quality drops like a chasm.
aviet Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 Podcast 3228 (first call) Thank you, listening now. I would vote you up, but seems I cannot do that.
Matthew Ed Moran Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 Thank you, listening now. I would vote you up, but seems I cannot do that. Hopefully it was what you were looking for. You can't vote me up because you haven't donated
Des Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 I never did understand the hypocrisy of supposed anarchists depending on collectivist methods of justice like ostracism. If I ostracise you (or threaten ostracism), I don't thereby become your ruler. If you do something for which only a few people wish to ostracise you, then that is not really ostracism, just sloughing off a few potential friends. If you do something for which most people want to ostracise you, for example, you defraud people, then you are showing that you don't place much value on being accepted by those people (or that you have difficulty predicting consequences, or empathising with your future self). No, suppose you want to do fraud, I'm not your ruler forbidding it, I'm just another man saying okay, but then I'm not your friend and I haven't got your back when your victim wants revenge. No ruler, therefore anarchy.
aviet Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 Hopefully it was what you were looking for. You can't vote me up because you haven't donated I didn't realise this. I have donated, but not on the email I have used to sign up with.
utopian Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 I think this is a cause of your (and everyone's else who have similar attitude) problems with finding virtuous women. Sleeping around is not a trait that attracts them. And I feel very sorry for you as I think it would be much easier for you to find a one if only you changed this attitude. There are only few things more rewarding than finding a suitable partner who you know you will spend the rest of your life with because of your common values. Sleeping with countless number of women won't get you anywhere close to this goal... so don’t complain about women because you yourself are not in the sphere of interest of such virtuous women… Alright, lets dissect this a little bit. You say, VIRTUOUS women. Yes, I have problems finding women that are virtuous, that I also want to be with. I do not contest that there are virtuous women out there. I do not contest, that there are virtuous women who I am overlooking because I am not attracted to them. I DO contest that, virtuousness, like intelligence, is scaled on a bell grade curve for any given population. Now, there is that top 10% of near perfect virtuous women. And the top 30% is probably acceptable, considering you can't expect people to be perfect. If you apply the percentage of people who are attractive enough to consider, that cuts that 30% down to 15%. Now considering that 15%, how many women of that percentage are already taken? Not homosexual? Not asexual? Not inapplicable because of some other variable? You could be looking at as little as 5 to 1% of virtuous women available out there. Considering this, you or anyone else has the audacity to suggest to me or anyone else that 100% of the male population should hold out on women their entire lives on the off chance that they could meet and keep that 1 to 5% of women? I got a better idea; you and everyone else who might suggest such a thing can go ahead and take your own advice, and leave guys like me to enjoy life to its maximum capacity. I won't go wasting my life chasing unicorns and impractical ideals. The environment is poisoned anyway, with mainstream media, feminism, and technological capabilities. Just look at the heavily skewed male to female population on this very philosophy forum. Women no longer recognize what a quality man is any more, and there is no doubt in my mind that going about your day to day life trying to get a woman to recognize you for those qualities will consume all the time from your life and is likely to leave you miserable and alone. There's a back and forth story going on in this thread RN about rotten bananas and such, being used for an allegory of the dating pool. In the end, both parties are going to have to admit that the quality of any pool is likely to be based on a bell grade curve, and all statistics under the 70% mark are likely to be not quite acceptable. There is nothing outside of that top 30%. It is illogical to expect 100% of applicants to all get a piece of that top 30%. Either you become perfect, get lucky, accept lower quality, or you accept misery. To expect everyone to get or be capable of getting the top percentage is foolishness. If I ostracise you (or threaten ostracism), I don't thereby become your ruler. If you do something for which only a few people wish to ostracise you, then that is not really ostracism, just sloughing off a few potential friends. If you do something for which most people want to ostracise you, for example, you defraud people, then you are showing that you don't place much value on being accepted by those people (or that you have difficulty predicting consequences, or empathising with your future self). No, suppose you want to do fraud, I'm not your ruler forbidding it, I'm just another man saying okay, but then I'm not your friend and I haven't got your back when your victim wants revenge. No ruler, therefore anarchy. That seems logical, but not applicable to a reputation system. This reputation system is a democracy, and democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. In this reputation system, the democratic wolves rule. An anarchic system would be more akin to simply allowing each individual to ignore any other individual. Last but not least, I want to point out that most people on this forum are men, and they are likely pursuing philosophy, pursuing truth, because they are lost in this modern environment. They are probably miserable and alone in this environment, especially with how alone one becomes when foregoing the lies of society and saturating themselves in the pain of truth. This is Stephan's core demographic donation base. There is no doubt in my mind most of these people are not going to donate for some guy to just tell them "step up ur game suuuuurrrn!!!" When the environment is designed to prevent men from doing so in the first place. In fact I am sure potential donators have been lost here, because some people have been messaging me for advice they aren't finding from the people who are telling them to just step up their game. The impracticality I have seen suggested here is abhorrent. Stop costing Stephan donators and give some real advice.
Des Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. This is true because democracy within statism has is not limited to non-aggressive actions only. A voting system within a sharehold company is limited by the national law, which generally forbids direct aggression, so the voting system in a company does not allow the wolves to dine on the sheep. A voting system in anarchy would be within voluntary associations, and, at the point that "everyone" understands anarchy well enough to have an anarchic society, "everyone" knows that you can't eat anyone by majority vote.
EclecticIdealist Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 But sir, what you call the garbage dump is what used to be the high quality market. The decadence is everywhere. Telling the men that they have to pay more will work for a few who can afford it. What's left for the rest? The minority of high quality women will find the minority of men able to afford - and then the quality drops like a chasm. Those who cannot afford it must either increasing their ability to pay or settle for lower quality food. Oftentimes, what may appear to be of inferior quality may turn out to be good quality food of commensurate value to their ability to pay, but locating such food takes effort. There are many who are looking for the best of the worst, and when the price is the same, though the value may be greater, there is competition in obtaining it. The truth, however, is that most men who are truly interested in higher quality food are simply unwilling to pay for it, or unwilling to increase their ability to pay for it and simply feel entitled to it and angry that it is not readily given to them. Many men that rate themselves a 7 or 8 and lament they are only able to attract 5s and 6s women fall into one of three categories. Men who are actually 7 or 8 in but projecting themselves as a 5 or 6 (which asks the question, are they really a 7 or 8?), men who are really 5 or 6 that are rating themselves higher than they actually are, or men who are 7 or 8 but are simply having trouble finding similar 7s and 8s. Such men need to realize that if they are only attracting 5s and 6s or below who are willing to take them, then they are only projecting a worth of a 6 or a 7 at best. These individuals need to up their game such that they are at least projecting their actual worth, if not better. Furthermore, such men need to realize that if they are not ever seeking to increase their worth, that entropy and age will drag them back. a 7 at age 25 will almost always be a 6 at age 30 and a 5 at 35 unless they do something to increase their worth over the space of 10 years. No quality woman wants a man who isn't constantly seeking to improve themselves, or their worth; that's part of being a quality man. It's not what you believe or know that's important, but what you apply.
kriskanya Posted June 16, 2016 Posted June 16, 2016 I don't think it's fair for Stef to place the majority of the blame on the caller's shortcomings (if you want to call the pursuit of women for sex and companionship in the short term until you find a virtuous mate a "shortcoming"). The question he raises is a valid one: where does an FDR man find such virtuous women? Also, when will women wake up and realize they can't have their cake and eat it too? I get it: Stef's wife, child, friends, and some female callers are virtuous, but that's anecdotal to the same extent as the caller's experiences with women are. Actually, the caller's anecdotal evidence is borne out by the framework the two of them discuss earlier in the call, in the context of women's hypergamy run wild with the pill and free stuff from the State. I've had a very similar experience to the caller, and so have several of my friends in NYC, SF, and LA. I know that doesn't qualify as extensive evidence, but it does fit the mold they lay out early in the call. I mean, how many of the guys listening to this show simply want a non-feminist, non-Bernie or Hillary supporting, good-looking, in-shape, kind, relatively-intelligent women who simply won't pull his wallet out through his testicles? I'll bet there are a lot of them, and they have a lot of trouble finding such a woman in this day and age. I'm sure most guys were enthralled (as I was) with that wicked smart black female from a recent show---precisely because she's such a rarity! Even if that male caller was flawed (Stef definitely jumped to some unsubstantiated conclusions here), why couldn't he just separate the wheat from the chaff and answer the question? Tell us to date a Christian woman because religion is less worse than moral relativism. Tell us to do the MGTOW thing and preserve our souls for the right women. I mean, anything would be better than simply smearing the guy.
regevdl Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 Wait...so the modern dating world is X and Stefan is a male who successfully pair bonded and bred. The modern dating world is a symptom. So the idea is to not function well in a sick world, right? The idea is to give the medicine to the sick world. The more sick people there are, of course the harder it will be to find a healthy individual. But just because it's more difficult doesn't mean compy to the sick world to make more people sick. Stick to virtue so you will find virtue and breed more virtue...that's the medicine. I hear a lot of these calls from the coast states. I came from the midwest and even though you find more religious people in the heart of the US....it's not like what you see on movies or the stereotypes. There are a lot of down to earth, attractive, nice, non-femenist women in more centralized parts of the US...from more rural areas. If it's that important to find a virtuous mate...consider moving out of the toxic soup of Coastal states and cities. 1
kriskanya Posted June 17, 2016 Posted June 17, 2016 Again, I think the issue is that it seems like virtuous women (read: people) seem to be in extremely short supply. To answer your suggestion: I've already tried this---I moved to Nashville to escape the vacuous women of Los Angeles. My experience has been that down here there are either the born-and-raised Southern girls who love God, football, guns, etc. and don't have a wide range of interests, there are the Bernie-supporting left-wing hipsters/musicians, and there are transplants (many from the Midwest). I know these are stereotypes, but they remarkably seem to ring true. I've dated all three: the first group doesn't take well to my (benign) atheism (I tell them I do have secular morality and don't necessarily mind religion, but no dice), the politics/life outlook of the second group always leads to intractable arguments (I once had a girl lecture me for an hour about gender being a social construct and proceeded into a 15-minute anti-Rand rant---I should've walked out), and the last group seems to be simply unremarkable (in my experience). Not to mention that Southern fare does not do favors for ladies' waistlines, and immediately disqualifies part of the pool. I would have absolutely loved to get Stef's view/suggestions on this matter. It seems like the dating market is completely broken. 1
AccuTron Posted June 18, 2016 Posted June 18, 2016 My doctor is a female , and looks very intelligent, also good looking, maybe 8-9. And she was nice to me. Maybe if you look around you will find some quality women. Looks are surface and deceptive. Also niceness. I speak from experience re good looking intelligent medical females. Try asking her about these links, and see what is really inside. (They are mostly from, or added to, FDR forums elsewhere.) Notice that we are talking non-trivially about patient harm and death. Does she engage, or retreat?: A New, Evidence-based Estimate of Patient Harms Associated w... : Journal of Patient Safety Why Most Published Research Findings Are False Can we believe any medical research – at all? | Dr. Malcolm Kendrick Flawed medical research may be ruining your health -- Health & Wellness -- Sott.net Editors, Publishers, Impact Factors, and Reprint Income These two are about medical fraud from the current/former senior editor of Lancet, the top British medical journal. www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736%2815%2960696-1.pdf Editor In Chief Of World’s Best Known Medical Journal: Half Of All The Literature Is False | Collective-Evolution If you really want to know a person, attempt to show them links about medical fraud or global warming fraud (many links in FDR). Blatant, can't miss it. See what kind of looks you get for being honest. 1
Tomi Posted June 21, 2016 Posted June 21, 2016 To the OP. I'm really sorry man.. to believe that which doesn't hold a drop of water must have taken some serious hurt from society. Who would date the "9's" or "10's"? I think a lot of people have the same idea, and there's a reason for it, and a very valid reason it's true in many circumstances. I used to believe this myself, for a long time, and I had worse success than dating "two points" lower. Over time I've found myself surprised by how much things change. It's funny and sad. Don't give up man. All the best, Tomi
Recommended Posts